People continue to hunt, fish, trap, and gather for subsistence purposes in the contemporary United States. This fact has implications for forest policy, as suggested by an international convention on temperate and boreal forests, commonly known as the Montréal Process. Three canons of law provide a legal basis for subsistence activities by designated social groups in Alaska and Hawaii and by American Indians with treaty rights in the coterminous forty-eight states. A literature review also presents evidence of such practices by people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds throughout the nation. Teleological notions of development espoused by both neoliberal and Marxist scholars suggest that subsistence activities should not persist in a First World setting except as failures of the officially sanctioned economic system. However, alternative economic perspectives from peasant studies and economic geography offer a conceptual framework for viewing at least some subsistence activities as having a logic and values outside of, if articulated with, market structures. Meeting the Montréal Process goal of providing for subsistence use of forests will require research focused on local practices and terms of access to resources as well as their relationship to state and capital processes. We outline the basics of a research agenda on subsistence for an emerging First World political ecology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BauerP T, 2000From Subsistence to Exchange and Other Essays (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).
2.
BeckleyT MHirschB H, 1997, “Subsistence and non-industrial forest use in the Lower Liard Valley”, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Ottawa.
BerkesFHughesAGeorgeP JPrestonR JCumminsB DTurnerJ, 1995, “The persistence of aboriginal land use: Fish and wildlife harvest areas in the Hudson and James Bay Lowland, Ontario”Arctic4881–93.
5.
BrownR BXuXJrTothJ F, 1998, “Lifestyle options and economic strategies: Subsistence activities in the Mississippi Delta”Rural Sociology63599–623.
6.
Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2002Catalog of Forest AcresUS Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Forest Resources Planning, Lakewood, CO.
7.
ChayanovA V, 1986The Theory of Peasant Economy (University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI).
8.
de JanvryA, 1981The Agrarian Question and Reformism in Latin America (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD).
9.
DickR E, 1996, “Subsistence economies: Freedom from the marketplace”Society and Natural Resources919–29.
10.
DickinsonT D, 1995Common Wealth: Self-sufficiency and Work in American Communities, 1830 to 1993 (University Press of America, New York).
11.
DolsakNOstromE, 2003The Commons in the New Millennium: Challenges and Adaptations (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
12.
EmeryM R, 1998Invisible Livelihoods: Non-timber Forest Products in Michigan's Upper Peninsula (UMI Dissertation Services, Ann Arbor, MI).
13.
EmeryM R, 2001, “Non-timber forest products and livelihoods in Michigan's Upper Peninsula”, in Forest Communities in the Third Millennium: Linking Research, Business, and Policy Toward a Sustainable Non-timber Forest Product Sector Eds Davidson-HuntIDuchesneL CZasadaJ C, USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St Paul, MN, pp 23–30.
14.
EmeryM R, 2002, “Space outside the market: Implications of NTFP certification for subsistence use”, in Tapping the Green Market: Certification and Management of NTFPs Eds ShanleyPPierceALairdSGuillenA (Earthscan, London) pp 302–312.
15.
EmeryM RGingerCNewmanSGiammussoMRB, 2003, “Special Forest Products in Context: Gatherers and Gathering in the Eastern United States”, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
16.
EmeryM RPierceASchroederR, 2004, “Criterion 6: Maintenance and enhancement of long-term multiple socio-economic benefits to meet the needs of societies. Indicator 47: Area and per cent of forests used for subsistence”, in Data Report: A Supplement to the National Report on Sustainable Forests—2003. FS-766A, May 2004 Analyses of the Indicators coordinator D R Darr, USDA Forests Service, Washington, DC, http://www.fs.fed.us/research/sustain/contents.htm.
17.
FairfaxS KFortmannL PHawkinsAHuntsingerLPelusoN LWolfS A, 1999, “The federal forests are not what they seem: Formal and informal claims to federal lands”Ecology Law Quarterly25630–646.
18.
ForsythC JMarckeseT A, 1993, “Folk outlaws: Vocabularies of motives”International Review of Modern Sociology2317–31.
19.
ForsythC JGramlingRWooddellG, 1998, “The game of poaching: Folk crimes in Southwest Louisiana”Society and Natural Resources1125–28.
20.
FortmannL, 1996, “Bonanza! The unasked questions: Domestic land tenure through international lenses”Society and Natural Resources9537–547.
21.
GaughanJ PFermanL A, 1987, “Toward an understanding of the informal economy”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science493 (September) 15–25.
22.
GeertzC, 1973The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (Basic Books, New York).
23.
Gibson-GrahamJ K, 1996The End of Capitalism (As We Knew It) (Blackwell, Cambridge).
24.
GlassR JMuthR MFlewellingR, 1990a, “Distinguishing recreation from subsistence in a modernizing economy”, in Social Science and Natural Resource Recreation Management Ed. ViningJ (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) pp 151–164.
25.
GlassR JMuthR MFlewellingR, 1990b, “Subsistence as a component of the mixed economic base in a modernizing community”, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA.
26.
GrenandPGrenandF, 1996, “Living in abundance: The forest of the Wayampi (Amerindians from French Guiana)”, in Current Issues in Non-timber Forest Products Research Eds Ruiz PerezMArnoldJEM (Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta) pp 177–196.
27.
HalperinR, 1990The Livelihood of Kin: Making Ends Meet “The Kentucky Way (University of Texas Press, Austin, TX).
28.
HartG, 1986Power, Labor, Livelihood: Processes of Change in Rural Java (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).
29.
HildebrandJ, 1998, “Coming home: Hunting squirrels and tigers with the Hmong”, in Harper's Magazine October, pp 72–80.
30.
HorwitzT, 1993, “The working poor: Minimum-wage jobs give many Americans only a miserable life”The Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition) 12 November, pp 1A, 4A.
31.
HuffordM, 1995, “Holding up the mountains: talk as historical discourse”, Smithsonian Folklife Center, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
32.
HuffordM, 2000, “Tending the commons: folklife and landscape in Southern West Virginia”, American Folklife Center, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
33.
JohnsonD RHunnERussellPVande KampMSearlesE, 1998, “Subsistence uses of vegetal resources in and around Lake Clark National Park and Preserve”, National Park Service, Seattle, WA.
34.
KraussB H, 1993Plants in Hawaiian Culture (University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI).
35.
McCarthyJ, 2002, “First World political ecology: Lessons from the Wise Use movement”Environment and Planning A341281–1302.
36.
McCayB JAchesonJ M, 1987The Question of the Commons: The Culture and Ecology of Communal Resources (University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ).
37.
McGranahanG, 1991, “Fuelwood, subsistence foraging, and the decline of common property”World Development191275–1287.
38.
MasonD A, 1990, “Vermont's other economy: the economic and socio-cultural values of hunting, fishing, and trapping for rural households”, School of Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
39.
MatsuokaJ KMcGregorD PMinerbiL, 1998, “Molokai: A Study of Hawaiian subsistence and community sustainability”, in Sustainable Community Development: Studies in Economic, Environmental, and Cultural Revitalization Eds HoffM D (Lewis, Boca Raton, FL) pp 25–45.
40.
Montréal Process Technical Advisory Committee, 2000, “Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests”, Technical Notes, Criteria 1–6, Montréal Process Liaison Office, Ottawa.
41.
Montréal Process Working Group, 1998, “The Montréal Process”, Montréal Process Liaison Office, Ottawa.
42.
MoreT AGlassR JZwickR R, 1994, “Fish and wildlife resources allocated through the invisible economy of rural New England”, in International Union of Game Biologists, XXI Congress “Forests and Wildlife … Toward the 21st Century”, Ed. ThompsonI D, Canadian Forest Service, Chalk River, Ontario, pp 175–178.
43.
MuthR M, 1990, “Community stability as social structure: The role of subsistence uses of natural resources in Southeast Alaska”, in Community and Forestry: Continuities in the Sociology of Natural Resources Eds LeeR GFieldD RBurchW RJr (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) pp 211–228.
44.
MuthR MDaigleJ JZwickR RGlassR J, 1996, “Trappers and trapping in advanced industrial society: Economic and sociocultural values of furbearer utilization in the Northeastern United States”Sociological Spectrum16421–436.
45.
MuthR MDickR EBlanchardK A, 2001, “Subsistence use of wildlife and native peoples' wildlife issues”, in Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management in North America Eds DeckerD JBrownT LSiemerW F, The Wildlife Society, 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814-2197, pp 329–351.
46.
National Archives and Records Administration, 2001, “Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, Parts 1 to 199: Parks, Forests, and Public Property”, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC.
47.
NelsonM KSmithJ, 1999Working Hard and Making Do: Surviving in Small Town America (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).
48.
NorrisR, 2002, “Alaska subsistence: a national park service management history”, National Park Service, Alaska Support Office, Anchorage, AK.
49.
PeñaD G, 1999, “Cultural landscapes and biodiversity: The ethnoecology of an Upper Río Grande watershed commons”, in Ethnoecology: Situated Knowledge/Located Lives Ed. NazareaV D (University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ) pp 107–132.
50.
PevarS L, 1992The Rights of Indians and Tribes: The Basic ACLU Guide to Indian and Tribal Rights (Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL).
51.
PolanyiK, 1977The Livelihood of Man Ed. PearsonH W (Academic Press, New York).
52.
PortesACastellsMBentonL A, 1989The Informal Economy: Studies in Advanced and Less Developed Countries (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD).
53.
RaishC, 2000, “Environmentalism, the Forest Service, and the Hispano communities of Northern New Mexico”Society and Natural Resources13489–508.
54.
RedcliftN, 1985, “The contested domain: Gender, accumulation and the labour process”, in Beyond Employment: Household, Gender and Subsistence Eds RedcliftNMingioneE (Basil Blackwell, Oxford) pp 92–125.
55.
RichardsR TCreasyM, 1996, “Ethnic diversity, resource values, and ecosystem management: Matsutake mushroom harvesting in the Klamath bioregion”Society and Natural Resources9359–374.
56.
SchroederR, 2002, “Contemporary subsistence use of nontimber forest products in Alaska”, in Nontimber Forest Products in the United States Eds JonesE TMcLainR JWeigandJ, (University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS) pp 300–326.
57.
ShanleyPLuzL, 2003, “The impacts of forest degradation on medicinal plant use and implications for health care in Eastern Amazonia”BioScience53573–584.
58.
TurnerN JLoewenD C, 1998, “The original ‘free trade’: Exchange of botanical products and associated plant knowledge in northwestern North America”Anthropologica4049–70.
59.
US Department of Interior National Park Service, 1999, “Hawaii Volcanoes National Park compendium”, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hilo, HI.
60.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002, “Regional Advisory Councils”, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
61.
West's, 1999West's Encyclopedia of American Law (West, St Paul, MN).
62.
WolfeR, 1999, “Subsistence: frequently asked questions”, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK.
63.
WolfeR J, 2000, “Subsistence in Alaska: a year 2000 update”, Division of Subsistence, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK.
